Switch to: Citations

References in:

Masking Disagreement among Experts

Episteme 3 (1-2):52-67 (2006)

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Why Deliberative Democracy?Amy Gutmann & Dennis Thompson - 2004 - Princeton University Press.
    The most widely debated conception of democracy in recent years is deliberative democracy--the idea that citizens or their representatives owe each other mutually acceptable reasons for the laws they enact. Two prominent voices in the ongoing discussion are Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson. In Why Deliberative Democracy?, they move the debate forward beyond their influential book, Democracy and Disagreement.What exactly is deliberative democracy? Why is it more defensible than its rivals? By offering clear answers to these timely questions, Gutmann and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   335 citations  
  • Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry.Helen E. Longino - 1990 - Princeton University Press.
    This is an important book precisely because there is none other quite like it.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1094 citations  
  • (1 other version)Experts: Which ones should you trust?Alvin I. Goldman - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (1):85-110.
    Mainstream epistemology is a highly theoretical and abstract enterprise. Traditional epistemologists rarely present their deliberations as critical to the practical problems of life, unless one supposes—as Hume, for example, did not—that skeptical worries should trouble us in our everyday affairs. But some issues in epistemology are both theoretically interesting and practically quite pressing. That holds of the problem to be discussed here: how laypersons should evaluate the testimony of experts and decide which of two or more rival experts is most (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   365 citations  
  • (1 other version)Science as Social Knowledge.Sharon L. Crasnow - 1992 - Hypatia 8 (3):194-201.
    In Science as Social Knowledge, Helen Longino offers a contextual analysis of evidential relevance. She claims that this "contextual empiricism" reconciles the objectivity of science with the claim that science is socially constructed. I argue that while her account does offer key insights into the role that values play in science, her claim that science is nonetheless objective is problematic.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   160 citations  
  • Modelling collective belief.Margaret Gilbert - 1987 - Synthese 73 (1):185-204.
    What is it for a group to believe something? A summative account assumes that for a group to believe that p most members of the group must believe that p. Accounts of this type are commonly proposed in interpretation of everyday ascriptions of beliefs to groups. I argue that a nonsummative account corresponds better to our unexamined understanding of such ascriptions. In particular I propose what I refer to as the joint acceptance model of group belief. I argue that group (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   214 citations  
  • Opening Pandora's Box. A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse.G. Nigel Gilbert & Michael Mulkay - 1985 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 175 (1):70-71.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   80 citations